Volviendo a pensar la alfabetización a través de los métodos mixtos: un estudio desde la mirada de los alumnos, las familias y el profesorado en la Educación Primaria en España
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7203/relieve.26.2.16915Palabras clave:
Métodos mixtos, Educación Primaria, Estatus socioeconómico, Prácticas de alfabetización, EspacioResumen
Los métodos mixtos presentan una alternativa sobre la investigación de la alfabetización como un fenómeno complejo. Este artículo analiza la integración de enfoques cuantitativos y cualitativos para hacer inferencias causales entre la alfabetización como práctica social y los diferentes espacios de interacción. Este estudio se realizó siguiendo un diseño secuencial de métodos mixtos. La muestra estuvo compuesta por 1.540 niños, 1.438 familias y 74 maestros. El proceso de recogida de información combinó cuestionarios y procedimientos etnográficos. Los datos se analizaron mediante la realización de análisis correlacionales, modelo de ecuaciones estructurales para grupos múltiples y análisis cualitativos comparativos. La integración aplicada en este estudio permitió identificar e interpretar las inferencias causales que existen entre las prácticas de alfabetización de estudiantes, familias y docentes que tienen lugar dentro y fuera de la escuela. Este estudio destaca la necesidad de considerar en profundidad los procesos de integración y difracción de datos cuantitativos y cualitativos en la investigación sobre alfabetización.
Descargas
Citas
Barringer, S.N. Eliason, S.R., & Leahey, E. (2013). A history of causal analysis in the Social Sciencies (pp. 9-26). In Morgan, S.L. (Ed.) Handbook of Causal Analysis for Social Research, pp.91-112. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6094-3_2
Barton, D. & Lee, C. (2013). Language online. Investigating digital texts and practices. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203552308
Bezemer, J. & Kress, G. (2016). Multimodality, learning and communication. A social semiotic frame. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315687537
Bloome, D. (2012). Classroom ethnography. En M. Grenfell, D. Bloome, C. Hardy, K. Pahl, J. Rowsell, & B. Street, Language, ethnography, and education. Bridging new literacy studies and Bourdieu (pp. 7-26). Routledge.
Borrero, N. & Yeh, C. (2010). Ecological English language learning among ethnic minority youth. Educational Researcher, 39(8), 571-581. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X10389810
Burnett, C. (2014). Investigating pupils’ interactions around digital texts: a spatial perspective on the “classroom-ness” of digital literacy practices in schools. Educational Review, 66(2), 192-209. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2013.768959
Burnett, V. (2016). Being together in classrooms at the interface of the physical and virtual: implications for collaboration in on/off-screen sites. Learning, Media and Technology, 41(4), 566-589. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2015.1050036
Burnett, C., Davies, J., Merchant, G., & Rowsell, J. (Eds.) (2014). New literacies around the globe: polcy and pedagogy. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315867311
Burnett, C. & Merchant, G. (2018). Literacy-as-event: accounting for relationality in literacy research. Discourse: Studies in the cultural politics of education (pre-print). https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2018.1460318
Byrne, B.M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS. Basic concepts, applications and programming. 2nd edition. Routledge.
Clark, V. L. P., & Ivankova, N. V. (2016). Mixed Methods Research: A Guide to the Field. Thousand Oaks, California. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483398341
Compton-Lilly, C. & Green, S. (Eds.) (2011). Bedtimes stories and book reports: connecting parent involvement and family literacy. Teachers College Press.
Davies, J. & Merchant, G. (2009). Web 2.0 for schools: Learning and social participation. Peter Lang.
Dicks, B., Soyinka, B., & Coffey, A. (2006). Multimodal ethnography. Qualitative Research, 6(1), 77-96. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794106058876
Duursma, E., Meijer, A., & De Bot, K. (2017). The impact of home literacy and family factors on screen media use among Dutch preteens. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 26(2), 612-622. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-016-0584-5
Escott, H. & Pahl, K. (2019). Learning from Ninjas: young people’s films as a lens for an expanded view of literacy and language, Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 40(6), 803-815. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2017.1405911
Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse. Textual analysis for social research. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203697078
Fielding, N. (2012). Triangulation and mixed methods designs: Data integration with new research technologies. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(2), 124-136. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689812437101
Flecha, R. (2014). Using Mixed Methods From a Communicative Orientation: Researching With Grassroots Roma. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 8(3), 245–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689814527945
Flick, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research: Theory, method and applications. Sage.
Gee, J.P. (2015). Literacy and education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315739571
Gil Flores, J. (2013). Measuring primary school children’s family socioeconomic status. Revista de Educación, 362, 298-322. https://doi.org/10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2011-362-162
Gillen, J. (2014). Digital literacies. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315813530
Gillen, J. & Cameron, C. (Eds.) (2010). International Perspectives on Early Childhood Research: A Day in the life. Palgrave Macmillan.
Gillen, J. & Kucirkova, N. (2018). Percolating spaces: Creative ways of using digital technologies to connect young children’s school and home lives. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(5), 834-846. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12666
Guzmán-Simón, F., Moreno-Morilla, C., & García-Jiménez, E. (2018). Analysis of Different Views and Conceptualizations of the Literacy Practices of Pupils, Families, and Teachers in Costa Rican Primary Education. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 32(3), 268-282. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2018.1464527
Hackett, A. (2017). Parents as researchers: collaborative ethnography with parents. Qualitative Research, 17(5), 481-497. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794116672913
Hackett, A. & Somerville, M. (2017). Poshuman literacies: young children moving in time, place and more-than-human worlds. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 17(3), 374-391. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468798417704031
Harding, D.J. and Seefeldt, K.S. (2013). Mixed methods and causal analysis. In Morgan, S.L. (Ed.) Handbook of Causal Analysis for Social Research (pp.91-112). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6094-3_6
Hathcoat, J. D., & Meixner, C. (2017). Pragmatism, Factor Analysis, and the Conditional Incompatibility Thesis in Mixed Methods Research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 11(4), 433–449. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689815622114
Heath, S.B. & Street, B.V. (2008). On ethnography. Approaches to language and literacy research. Teachers College Press.
Hemmings, A., Beckett, G., Kennerly, S., & Yap, T. (2013). Building a Community of Research Practice: Intragroup Team Social Dynamics in Interdisciplinary Mixed Methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 7(3), 261–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689813478468
Hill, S. (2010). The millennium generation: Teacher-researchers exploring new forms of literacy. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 10(3), 314-340. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468798410372820
Howe, K. R. (2012). Mixed Methods, Triangulation, and Causal Explanation. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(2), 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689812437187
Hull, G. & Schultz, K. (2002). Connecting schools with Out-of-School worlds. Insights from recent research on literacy in non-school settings. In G. Hull & K. Schultz (Eds.) School’s Out! Bridging Out-of-School Literacies with Classroom Practice (pp. 32-57). Teachers College Press.
Hvit, S. (2015). Literacy events in toddler groups: preschool educators’ talk about their work with literacy among toddlers. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 15(3), 311-330. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468798414526427
Ivankova, N. V., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Teaching mixed methods research: using a socio-ecological framework as a pedagogical approach for addressing the complexity of the field. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 21(4), 409–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2018.1427604
Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality. A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London and New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203970034
LaRoche, S., Joncas, M., & Foy, P. (2017). Sample design in PIRLS (2016). In M.O. Martin, I.V.S. Mullis, & M. Hooper (Eds.) Method and procedures in PIRLS 2016 (pp. 3.1-3.34). Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts: TIMMS & PIRLS International Study Center.
Mackey, M. (2010). Reading from the feet up: the local work of literacy. Children’s Literature in Education, 41, 323-339. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10583-010-9114-z
McKim, C. A. (2017). The Value of Mixed Methods Research: A Mixed Methods Study. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 11(2), 202–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689815607096
McTavish, M. (2014). ‘‘I’ll do it my own way!’’: A young child’s appropriation and recontextualization of school literacy practices in out-of-school spaces. Journal of Early Chidlhood Literacy, 14(3), 319-344. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1468798413494919
Mahoney, J. (1999). Nominal, ordinal, and narrative appraisal in macrocausal analysis. The American Journal of Sociology, 104, 1154–1196. https://doi.org/10.1086/210139
Mahoney, J. (2000). Strategies of inference in small-N analysis. Sociological Methods and Research, 28, 387–424. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124100028004001
Mahoney, J., Goertz, G., & Ragin, C. C. (2013). Causal models and counterfactuals. In S. L. Morgan (Ed.), Handbook of causal analysis for social research (pp. 75- 90). Springer.
Marsh, J. (2011). Young children’s literacy practices in a virtual world: establishing an online interaction order. Reading Research Quarterly, 46(2), 101-118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.46.2.1
Mertens, D. M. (2007). Transformative Paradigm. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 212–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689807302811
Moreno-Morilla, C., Guzmán-Simón, F., & García-Jiménez, E. (2017). Los hábitos de lectura y escritura en los estudiantes de Educación Primaria: un análisis dentro y fuera de la escuela. Porta Linguarum, II (monográfico), 117-137.
Moreno-Morilla, C., García-Jiménez, E., & Guzmán-Simón. E (2018). Relationship between literacy events and low socio-economic status in primary education: analysis of different views of Spanish-speaking pupils, families, and teachers. RICERCAZIONE, 10(2), 149-169. https://doi.org/10.32076/RA10210
Moreno-Morilla, C., Guzmán-Simón, F., & García-Jiménez, E. (2019). Literacy practices of primary education children in Andalusia (Spain): A familybased perspective. British Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 117-136. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3487
Natasi, B., Hitchcock, J. y Brown, L. (2010). An inclusive framework for conceptualizing mixed methods design typologies: Moving toward fully integrated synergistic research models. In A. Tashakkori y C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 305-338). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506335193.n13
Neuman, S.B. & Celano, D. (2001). Access to print in low-income and middle-income communities: an ecological study of four neighborhoods. Reading Research Querterly, 36(1), 8-26.
Pahl, K. & Allan, C. (2011). ‘I don’t know what literacy is’: Uncovering hidden literacies in a community library using ecological and participatory research methodologies with children. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 11(2), 190-213. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1177/1468798411401864
Pahl, K. & Rowsell, J. (2012). Literacy and Education. Understanding the New Literacy Studies in the Classroom. Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473915237
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage.
Pellegrini, A. & Galda, L. (2003). The Development of School-Based Literacy: A Social Ecological Perspective. Routledge.
Pezoa, JP., Mendive, S., & Strasser, K. (2019). Reading interest and family literacy practices from prekindergarten to kindergarten: Contributions from a cross-lagged analysis. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 47(2), 284-295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2018.12.014
Plano Clark, V. L., & Ivankova, N. V. (2016). Mixed Methods Research: A Guide to the Field. Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483398341
Poveda, D. & Sánchez Carrión, J.J. (2010). Las prácticas y estilos de literacidad de los adolescentes fuera de la escuela: una exploración cuantitativa de las relaciones entre literacidad, escolarización y origen familiar. Sociolinguistic Studies, 4(1), 85-114. https://doi.org/10.1558/sols.v4i1.85
Rowsell, J. & Pahl, K. (2007). Sedimented identities in texts: Instances of practice. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(3), 388-404. http://dx.doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.42.3.3
Rowsell, J. & Pahl, K. (Eds.) (2015). The Routledge Handbook of Literacy Studies. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315717647
Sorde Marti, T., & Mertens, D. M. (2014). Mixed Methods Research With Groups at Risk: New Developments and Key Debates. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 8(3), 207–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689814527916
Tashakkori, A., & Creswell, J. W. (2007). The New Era of Mixed Methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 3–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689807309913
Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (2003). The past and future od mixed methods research: from data triangulation to mixed models design. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of Mixed Method in Social and Behavioral Research (pp. 671-702). Sage.
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2010). Overview of contemporary issues in mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), SAGE Handbook of Mixed Method in Social & Behavioral Research (pp. 1-41). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506335193.n1
Tusting, K. & Barton, D. (2005). Community-based local literacies research. In R. Beach, J. Green, M. Kamil, & T. Shanahan (Eds.), Multidisciplinary perspectives on Literacy Research (pp. 243-263). Hampton Press.
Uprichard, E., & Dawney, L. (2019). Data Diffraction. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689816674650
van Leewen, T. (2005). Introducing social semiotics. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203647028
Woumans, E., Ameloot, S., Keuleers, E., & Van Assche, E. (2019). The relationship between second language acquisition and nonverbal cognitive abilities. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(7), 1169-1177. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xge0000536
Yin, R.K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage.
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Los autores ceden de forma no exclusiva los derechos de explotación de los trabajos publicados a RELIEVE (a los solos efectos de favorecer la difusión de los artículos publicados:firmar contratos de difusión, de integración en bases de datos, etc.) y consienten que se distribuyan bajo la licencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-Uso No Comercial 4.0 International (CC-BY-NC 4.0), que permite a terceros el uso de lo publicado siempre que se mencione la autoría de la obra y la fuente de publicación, y se haga uso sin fines comerciales.
Los autores pueden llegar a otros acuerdos contractuales adicionales e independientes, para la distribución no exclusiva de la versión del trabajo publicado en esta revista (por ejemplo, incluyéndolo en un repositorio institucional o publicándolo en un libro), siempre y cuando se cite claramente que la fuente original de publicación es esta revista.
La mera remisión del artículo a RELIEVE supone la aceptación de estas condiciones.
